Apache Now the Leader in SSL Servers?

miller60 writes "Apache has overtaken Microsoft as the leading developer of secure web servers, according to Netcraft's monthly SSL survey. Apache now runs on 44.0% of secure web sites, compared to 43.8% for Microsoft. Apache's recent gains are attributed to the inclusion of mod_ssl in version 2, and strong growth of SSL-enabled sites in non-US markets where Apache has stronger market share."

Who chooses Microsoft?

[Mc_Anthony]

Are there any admins out there that actually prefer Microsoft web solutions
over LAMP (Linux, Apache, MySQL, PHP)? Or do decisions like that come from on high in many organizations. As an admin who works for a government institution, I
always have the freedom to select the software I want...

I have pity on those admin that are forced to maintain Microsoft solutions
against their will

Why so much different?

[imemyself]

Out of curiosity, does anyone know why the stat's for SSL servers so much different for regular HTTP? Are more business or ecomm(shudder) sites running on IIS? Or am I missing something.

Thought MS was further back.

[gasmonso]

Honestly, all MS bashing aside, why would anyone use MS over Apache? The support and knowledgebase surrounding Apache is second to none. Plus its free, but to me thats second to the quality and performance. Keep it up Apache!

http://religiousfreaks.com/ [religiousfreaks.com]

Re:Not really. It all depends on how you count it.

[Keyslapper]

Umm, No.

If you go in dollars collected, then yes, I'd have to agree that Microsoft is way out in front. Dollar value on the other hand, is most certainly up for debate.

And of course the obligatory:

I for one, welcome our new open source overlords!!

Re:Not really. It all depends on how you count it.

[reldruH]

It does all depend on how you count it, but using the amount of revenue each product generates as your method of counting is the kind of thinking that leads to open source software being considered worthless. Yes the products that Microsoft's shipped have generated far more revenue, but Apache isn't even trying to compete on that level. If you must compare the two, compare them by actual quality of product, usually as determined by market share. If one program costs $10 and another costs $100 and you measure their quality by how much money each has made, you're not going to get an accurate comparison.

Re:Who chooses Microsoft?

[DaHat]

Yes... Call me crazy but I love Windows, IIS, ASP.NET and MS SQL.

Granted... I have limited experience with LAMP, when I set out to build my lil beg site [brendansstudentloans.com] back in January I tried doing it with LAMP for a time because of the cost savings that I'd have from hosting on Linux... unfortunately there were plenty of behind the scenes things that I just couldn't figure out and didn't have the time or desire to spend to make it work... so I backed off and did it under a pure Microsoft side and things came together quite smoothly.

My only regret is not yet getting enough traffic to my site, as well as having my Adsense account nuked.

Re:funny

[Psiren]

I mention how bad Microsoft products are for mission critical servers and applications like websites.

On what information are you basing this statement? If you looked at the stats (several comments above have the links) you'll see that IIS 6 compares very well against Apache. When you're making these statements, do you mention these statistics? I'm guessing not. There are plenty of reasons to use Apache over IIS, but security is not top of the list.

I'm all for advocating open source, but if you're going to do it, don't spout bullshit. You come across as nothing more than a MS basher, and frankly, I don't want people like you speaking on my behalf.

Re:false readings QWZX

[Anonymous Coward]

Can I ask one question -- why is this bullshit moderated up? Can anyone just post any piece of random crap and Slashdot will just believe it if it favors Apache or disfavors Microsoft?

Is it too much to ask for this Bozo to actually, I don't know, PROVE his ridiculous statement? Would it be too much to ask that he explain exactly how ANY Apache server would show if his stupid accusation were true?

Bah. I'm no Microsoft fan, but I hate stupidity more.

Re:false readings

[PsychicX]

More importantly, the reported difference is 0.2%. You can't honestly expect me to believe that's a statistically significant difference; you'd need much more data to even get 1% margin of error.

i believe it's because...

[WeAreAllDoomed]

everyone just now finally figured out how to create and use self-signed certs with apache and openssl :-)